Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission

Search representations

Results for Mayday! Action Group search

New search New search

Support

Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission

Policy H8 Specialist accommodation for older people and those with specialised needs

Representation ID: 5460

Received: 17/03/2023

Respondent: Mayday! Action Group

Number of people: 8

Representation Summary:

The demographics of our area are different from other areas and it is recognised that our ageing population will grow during the plan period.

It is also clear that more specialist accommodation will be needed in our area for both married and single pensioners.

We support the outlined policy

Paras 5.53 – 5.58 suggest that CDC’s Planning team will have a significantly greater workload if they are to vet these applications for delivery on the essential detail. Are they sufficiently resourced? Do they have planners with this specialist knowledge?

Attachments:


Our response:

Support noted.

Support

Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission

Policy P1 Design Principles

Representation ID: 5461

Received: 17/03/2023

Respondent: Mayday! Action Group

Number of people: 8

Representation Summary:

Admirable content, full of aspiration. Achievable? Demands substantial ongoing monitoring in real time.

Attachments:


Our response:

Support and comment noted. Comment noted. Monitoring is addressed in Appendix F

Object

Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission

Policy P2 Local Character and Distinctiveness

Representation ID: 5462

Received: 17/03/2023

Respondent: Mayday! Action Group

Number of people: 8

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Again lots of positive parameters but neither developers nor their contractors are sufficiently policed in respect of their actions at site.
Enforcement should be statutory and not a cost laid at the door of underfunded local councils.
Sites which are cleared of hedgerows and trees BEFORE planning applications are lodged should see the offenders fined when this is discovered.
We have a live example locally of a significant landowner having installed vicious barbed wire fencing and removed many hundreds of metres of mature undergrowth very recently and posted large signage suggesting that the land now fenced off is a nature conservation area.
Points 7. And 8. within Policy P2 will require serious policing if they are ever to be achieved.

Attachments:


Our response:

The Council understands the points made and certainly thinks that enforcement and preventing inappropriate site clearance is important. However, there are limits to what the Council can do in this regard as any development can clear their site, providing that doing so doesn’t breach relevant legislation or planning conditions or involve the removal of protected features such as TPOs. Unfortunately planning policies cannot change this situation. However, the new biodiversity net gain requirements should discourage such practices, as site clearance will then mean that extra BNG credits would be required, which would make it disadvantageous for developers purse such an approach.

Object

Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission

Policy P3 Density

Representation ID: 5463

Received: 17/03/2023

Respondent: Mayday! Action Group

Number of people: 8

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Density of 35 dwellings per hectare is absolutely not appropriate in semi-rural areas.

The absence of any reference in the 7 point policy to the importance of both wildlife and biodiversity is absolutely shocking.

Regrettably, without some compulsory purchase orders to secure land for dedicated cycle routes and footpaths, the repeated message in this Draft Local Plan that homeowners must forego their cars and take to a bicycle or their feet will just not happen.

Our area is already crowded and vehicular traffic is growing and WILL NOT REDUCE until and unless regular, affordable rail and bus connections are IN PLACE. Wonderful idealistic thinking but very far removed from reality.

Attachments:


Our response:

Objections noted. i) The Housing Density Evidence Study demonstrates the appropriateness of 35 dph as a minimum density expectation. Furthermore, the proposed P3 policy requires a design-led approach to be taken that considers site-specific constraints including surrounding context (such as a rural setting) to ensure that the optimum site density is appropriate. ii) P3 does not specify requirements relating to biodiversity so as not to duplicate or contradict requirements proposed within NE5. iii) Policies T1 and T2 propose how development be required to encourage sustainable travel and avoid or reduce need to travel by car. P3 does not attempt to duplicate these requirements but will support that approach by facilitating sustainable patterns of development.

Object

Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission

Policy P4 Layout and Access

Representation ID: 5464

Received: 17/03/2023

Respondent: Mayday! Action Group

Number of people: 8

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

We can only reiterate our earlier comments. The District is nowhere near in a position to provide an integrated public transport solution to its residents. There is no evidence in this Draft Local Plan of Future-Proof masterplan for the City of Chichester or the District. Policy P4 is thus unsound and smacks of Mission Impossible.

Attachments:


Our response:

Objection and comments noted. The provision of an integrated public transport network and associated expectations on new development (including contributions) are reflected within policies T1 and T2. It is therefore considered unnecessary to duplicate these points within P4, which is principally concerned with design matters associated with development layout and access

Object

Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission

Policy E6 Chichester City Centre

Representation ID: 5465

Received: 17/03/2023

Respondent: Mayday! Action Group

Number of people: 8

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Full of laudable aspirations and objectives. However, the Chichester Vision document dates back to 2017 and requires a very rapid 2023 update.
Much has changed in people’s lives since 2017. Our view is that any Vision has to be the product of a competitive tendering process and there has to be a substantial budget allocated to this process.
We are not aware of any visionary architects, landscape and environmental planners being in full-time employment of CDC. If they are there, why do we not hear from them?
Chichester should be the jewel in this part of West Sussex’s crown but it is increasingly a tarnished jewel.
City centres will need to become safe places for more people to live – and the accommodation will not be large, terraced or detached homes, but tastefully designed apartments.
There will be a need to establish a much better system of volume parking. Have underground car parks been considered?
Has ground floor parking with accommodation above been adequately used?
The Vision for Chichester 2023 should be the TOP PRIORITY for the newly elected District Council.

Attachments:


Our response:

The 2017 Chichester Vision remains the current version and the plan text should continue to refer to the Vision. The action plan relating to the Vision continues to be reviewed to ensure that it reflects the most appropriate projects

Support

Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission

Policy E8 Built Tourist and Leisure Development

Representation ID: 5466

Received: 17/03/2023

Respondent: Mayday! Action Group

Number of people: 8

Representation Summary:

It is true that our district has a great deal to offer but there are massive holes in the fabric.
Infrastructure – roads, rail, bus, entertainment venue(s), hotel and other accommodation – all are lacking and are not up to the level of need or expectation of all ages of our demographic population.
There is no surprise that AirBnB has so successfully penetrated the tourism sector.
We do not yet know what will become of the former Army & Navy store but we have to hope and pray that the new use will be inspirational and not solely retail.

Attachments:


Our response:

Support and comment noted

Support

Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission

Policy E9 Caravan and Camping Sites

Representation ID: 5467

Received: 17/03/2023

Respondent: Mayday! Action Group

Number of people: 8

Representation Summary:

This is an important sector for tourism. Glamping is the most modern development and should surely be encouraged within the District in appropriate locations.
Water supply issues and the need for a region-wide water supply study will need to be seen as a top priority. Water for drinking etc. is a finite supply item and tourism inevitably loads the strain on our water supply network, particularly, if as is widely predicted global temperatures will rise much faster than predicted.
Quality of sites and their services is critical.

Attachments:


Our response:

Comment noted.

Support

Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission

Policy E10 Equestrian Development

Representation ID: 5468

Received: 17/03/2023

Respondent: Mayday! Action Group

Number of people: 8

Representation Summary:

It is of deep concern to the residents of Chidham & Hambrook that CDC Planning has not applied the good intentions stated in Policy E10 when it comes to the proposal to develop the Willowbrook Riding School and Stables located at the north of our Parish.
To access this site, the developers will have to create a two vehicle wide bridge over the unique Ham Brook chalk stream. Only 2 of the proposed dwellings will actually be located in Hambrook BUT all the new homes will only be accessed via roads within the parish. The site for development lies extremely proximate to the connective Wildlife Corridor linking the harbour AONB with the SDNP. Our view is that the planning application should have been refused at the outset for these and many other reasons.
Equestrian activity is of great benefit to both fully fit and severely disabled people of all ages. It is a great community asset and Willowbrook should not be lost to greed.

Attachments:


Our response:

Support noted

Object

Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission

8.1

Representation ID: 5469

Received: 17/03/2023

Respondent: Mayday! Action Group

Number of people: 8

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

To be attractive to businesses, residents and economically essential tourists, efficient, affordable, smooth-running and frequent rail and bus services are absolutely essential.
Regrettably our plan area is not well served by rail or bus services – but this is as much a national as it is a local issue.

We would not agree with the suggestion that we have adequate cycle and pedestrian routes. There has been a stop/start process on dedicated cycle routes along the A259 between Fishbourne and the Havant Borough border. It is a fact that seems not to be willingly acknowledged that the A259, whilst categorised as a ‘resilient road’ (because it is the only viable alternative which exists to take the traffic from the A27 when that vital transport artery – dual carriage road – is out of action (which is not an infrequent occurrence)

We would contend that in parts the A259 is too narrow to allow for separate pedestrian and cycle routes. It is very clearly dangerous to have cyclists riding at 20+mph on the same route as pedestrians of all ages and very often mothers with buggies.

Attachments:


Our response:

i) The strategy aims to improve the availability and frequency of public transport links as well as the performance of the A27 through junction improvements at Chichester.
ii) A key objective of policy T1 is to improve access to sustainable means of travel including public transport, walking and cycling.
The policy will lead to investment and planned improvements

For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our help guide.